Jump to content

442 Wide Diamond with inverted wingbacks - Help me design!


Recommended Posts

I'm managing Troyes and I've been having mixed results with a flat 442, scoring the most in the league but also conceding heavily. Since I didn't know what I could do to change defensively apart from get new players I decided to take some inspiration from Bielsa and try a 442 wide diamond with inverted wingbacks.

I've tested this tactic in just one game on a Balanced mentality and a few different TIs that the screenshot doesn't have. It had very high possession but low shots. Things improved when I increased mentality, defensive line and directness. So I amended it. The game finished 1-1 and my goal came from a penalty but I noticed the (equal strength) opposition had very few shots on my goal. My team are favourites to reach the playoffs this season but I notice that in this division all the teams are very similar in quality with a few exceptions who should be in the higher division.

This is my template. Feel free to give advice or input. I'm already guessing I need my AMC on attack duty. I was considering using a halfback as well because both inverted wingbacks would cover the central space very well.

PIs as follows:
MR: Get further forward
DL: Get further forward
DCL: Stay wider
DCR: Stay wider

I should mention my strikers can definitely play as Target Man or Deep Lying Forward or (slow) Poacher, but most of my team is slow and I notice they are really struggling to get behind opposition defences.
 

20200725220334_1.jpg

Edited by permanentquandary
Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that I don't know your players, I can only comment on the tactic. 

As for the IWB role, it absolutely makes sense in a formation such as the wide diamond. But be careful because the IWB is a more demanding role than a standard WB (let alone FB), so you need to make sure you have the right player(s) for it.

On the other hand, what I see as potentially problematic in this particular setup is the enganche. It's a fairly static playmaker role, which basically means 2 things:

1. it's more suitable for patient possession-based setups (except perhaps if you have a certain type of player whose traits might modify the role's basic hard-coded behavior)

2. it needs a lot of support from teammates in terms of available passing options around him

Now, your overall tactic neither looks like being possession-oriented (except for using 2 PM roles) nor do I see proper support for the enganche (due to wingers on both flanks coupled with the wide attacking width). Because defensive wingers are a simple role that looks to win the ball on the flank and then launch a quick early cross, which can be suitable for a hoofball style or some hybrid between wing-play and direct counter. But those styles basically require an aggressive runner in the AMC slot, which the enganche is definitely not. 

On the other hand, I've seen a number of tactics that work in FM even though in theory they do have flaws. Therefore, if you have tested the tactic and it works as you want it to, then please ignore my remarks and stick with it :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Fatkidscantjump Sorry mate, but you definitely cannot discuss your own tactical issues in someone else's thread, even if the OP themself is not opposed to it. Such are the rules. So I unfortunately had to remove your post, because I really have to prevent topics from being hijacked/derailed, even if there was no bad intention on your part.

Please start your own separate thread, post again a screenshot of your tactic there and you'll get proper feedback :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 22 minutes, Experienced Defender a dit :

@Fatkidscantjump Sorry mate, but you definitely cannot discuss your own tactical issues in someone else's thread, even if the OP themself is not opposed to it. Such are the rules. So I unfortunately had to remove your post, because I really have to prevent topics from being hijacked/derailed, even if there was no bad intention on your part.

Please start your own separate thread, post again a screenshot of your tactic there and you'll get proper feedback :thup:

I understand completely, I originally just wanted to comment about how i'm using a similar tactic aswell but I got carried away and ended up posting screenshots and videos.

Created another thread just now, good thing I had the whole thing still in my clipboard so I could copy paste it !

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/07/2020 at 23:49, Experienced Defender said:

Given that I don't know your players, I can only comment on the tactic. 

As for the IWB role, it absolutely makes sense in a formation such as the wide diamond. But be careful because the IWB is a more demanding role than a standard WB (let alone FB), so you need to make sure you have the right player(s) for it.

On the other hand, what I see as potentially problematic in this particular setup is the enganche. It's a fairly static playmaker role, which basically means 2 things:

1. it's more suitable for patient possession-based setups (except perhaps if you have a certain type of player whose traits might modify the role's basic hard-coded behavior)

2. it needs a lot of support from teammates in terms of available passing options around him

Now, your overall tactic neither looks like being possession-oriented (except for using 2 PM roles) nor do I see proper support for the enganche (due to wingers on both flanks coupled with the wide attacking width). Because defensive wingers are a simple role that looks to win the ball on the flank and then launch a quick early cross, which can be suitable for a hoofball style or some hybrid between wing-play and direct counter. But those styles basically require an aggressive runner in the AMC slot, which the enganche is definitely not. 

On the other hand, I've seen a number of tactics that work in FM even though in theory they do have flaws. Therefore, if you have tested the tactic and it works as you want it to, then please ignore my remarks and stick with it :thup:

I basically chose Enganche because of the flawed Bielsa inspiration. The other reason is that my team has many players of only average pace and acceleration (10-12) with low flair and dribbling. I don't expect them to go past anyone. So I thought it would be better to adopt a pass and move style.

I have two very good full backs who as good as my centre mids on the ball so I may as well use IWBs. My forwards work reasonably hard and are good in the air.

But overall it's just a template. I am open to any and all changes that incorporate the IWBs and a possession-focused style that's solid defensively more or less by being solid offensively.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, permanentquandary said:

I basically chose Enganche because of the flawed Bielsa inspiration. The other reason is that my team has many players of only average pace and acceleration (10-12) with low flair and dribbling. I don't expect them to go past anyone. So I thought it would be better to adopt a pass and move style

Okay, but then do not use defensive wingers (or even standard wingers), at least not on both flanks. You cannot consider roles in isolation, because all tactical elements must interact with one another in order for a tactic to make sense. 

 

16 minutes ago, permanentquandary said:

I am open to any and all changes that incorporate the IWBs and a possession-focused style

If you want a "possession-focused" style, why on earth do you use more direct passing (plus wide attacking width)? And of course, the already mentioned (defensive) wingers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to go with a more 'classic' Bielsa system, I would use a HB at the DM position, and them change the wide midfielders to WMs, at least one of which should be on Attack. It's not going to be textbook because you're playing with two forwards rather than one; I suspect that having WMs instead of DWs will give you more options move forward without having to rely on ticking up Direct Passing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...